Nelson v. Dickinsen et al

Filing 75

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/18/13 ordering plaintiff's 08/28/13 motion to hold these proceedings in abeyance 73 is construed as a motion for extension of time to file objections to the 08/16/13 findings and recommendat ions, and so construed is granted. Plaintiff's 09/09/13 motion for extension of time 74 is granted. Plaintiff is granted 45 days from the date of this order to file objections to the 8/16/13 findings and recommendations which recommended that plaintiff's 60(b) motion be denied. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

DYKE EDWARD NELSON,

10

Plaintiff,

11

vs.

12

No. 2:10-CV-2156 MCE JFM P

DR. ALEX ZIGA,

13

Defendants.

14
15

ORDER
/

Plaintiff has filed a document styled as a motion to hold these proceedings in

16 abeyance pending his transfer to Atascadero State Hospital (ECF No. 73). On April 29, 2013, the
17 assigned District Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 66.)
18 Judgment was entered on the same date. (ECF No. 67.) On May 9, 2013, plaintiff filed a motion
19 for relief from the judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). (ECF No. 69.)
20 On August 16, 2013, this court issued findings and recommendations recommending that the
21 60(b) motion be denied. (ECF No. 73.) On September 9, 2013, plaintiff filed a notice of change
22 of address and motion for extension of time. (ECF No. 74.)
23

Good cause appearing, the court construes plaintiff’s motion to hold these

24 proceedings in abeyance as a first motion for extension of time to file objections to the
25 undersigned’s August 16, 2013 findings and recommendations. So construed, both motions for
26 extension of time will be granted.
1

1

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Plaintiff’s August 28, 2013 motion to hold these proceedings in abeyance (ECF

3 No. 73) is construed as a motion for extension of time to file objections to the August 16, 2013
4 findings and recommendations and, so construed, is granted;
5

2. Plaintiff’s September 9, 2013 motion for extension of time (ECF No. 74) is

6 granted; and
7

2. Plaintiff is granted forty-five days from the date of this order in which to file

8 and serve objections to the undersigned’s August 16, 2013 findings and recommendations which
9 recommended that plaintiff’s 60(b) motion be denied.
10 DATED: September 18, 2013.
11
12
13
14

DAD:12
nels2156.ext

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2